Letters to the Editor — January 31, 2013

Thursday

Jan 31, 2013 at 3:15 AM

To the Editor:

I was home for a family visit this weekend and read with interest the recent headline and opinion piece about “closing the door” on the East Rochester School open concept environment. The articles brought to mind many fond memories of my early days at the school from First grade through sixth (1969-1975). Even though I was very young I can still recall being aware of how lucky we were to be attending such a special school where the needs of the children were always the top priority.

Many of my classmates were bussed in from far away to attend our experimental school. We had the latest in technology, new textbooks, “tote trays” to carry our belongings from class to class and teachers who were excited to be there each day. We were challenged, encouraged and motivated to learn. We were taught to respect each others space and when to be quiet so other students could concentrate. The concept of openness applied to much more than the lack of walls.

These early experiences at the “New” East Rochester School instilled and nurtured a life long curiosity in me and a desire to dream big with no limits or boundaries. The parents and teachers showed their love for us through their commitment to give us the best learning environment. I had no idea at the time how lucky and valued we were. It is probably not a coincidence that when my class graduated from Spaulding High in 1981 many of the top ranked students had spent their formative years at the New ERS.

It is my hope that the current parents, teachers and administrators will recognize that this little experimental school was more than just a passing fad or fashionable philosophy. It was a place where children were given the tools to succeed and grow to become positive contributors to society. Valuing education and wanting the best for our kids should never go out of style.

Michael P. Rainboth, Esq.

Coughlin, Rainboth, Murphy & Lown

Portsmouth

To the Editor:

In regards to Mr. Boros’ “vision” of Oct. 16 (and why did it take him this long to write about it?)...

Goodness knows I’m not exactly a fan of Mr. Obama, but for Mr. Boros to group him with Osama Bin laden is on the same league as Mr. Rhodes lumping Mother Theresa, the Revs. John Wesley and MLK, and even Jesus Christ (!!) with OBL in his letter to the editor shortly after 9/11 — in his view they were all the same... he’s just being a radical in his time, the same as they’d been in theirs. (!!)

And while I cannot speak about what the Rev. MLK would’ve said, should’ve been done about, or with OBL, I do know what Edmund of East Anglia (d. 870), Edward the Confessor (1003-66), Canute of Denmark (XI century), Good King Wenceslas (903-29), Ferdinand of Castille (1199-1252) and Louis of France (1214-70), officially declared saints, would’ve done: the moment it became clear to them that the man was a rabid dog with whom no compromise, negotiation or conciliation was possible, they would’ve strapped on a sword and waged unrelenting war against him!

Do I have to mention how the British general “Chinese” Gordon, whose Christian credentials were impeccable, willingly sacrificed himself to ensure that the Sudan’s Mahdi (OBL’s XIX century predecessor) was brought down? Or the circumstances of Jesus’ own return (Rev. 19: 11-21)? We honor honorable foes — the Mexican cadets at Chapultepec, Geronimo, Rommel — but a snake we stomp to death.

And if the statue of MLK were to drip blood, it would very likely be from its eyes, over the way his dreams have been portrayed, not by those opposed to him, but by the very ones who were supposed to benefit from it.

It is enough to make you weep.

B.J. Figueredo

Gonic

To the Editor:

President Obama receives a whopping, humongous, jaw-dropping, outrageous, and luxurious $400,000 annual salary, which doesn’t even include extravagant bonuses like an annual expense account, a travel account, and an entertainment stipend. All those fringe benefits bring Obama’s total annual salary to over $550,000! Those numbers are based on information obtained from the website http://www.celebritynetworth.com/articles/entertainment-articles/how-much-money-does-the-president-make. I, on the other hand, receive a meager $790 per month, and that includes a less-than-generous $53 per month in food stamps. My total annual income is a paltry $9,490. In fact, that’s below the federal poverty level. Talk about division of wealth in America!

Of course, such income disparity and conspicuous consumption is nothing new under the sun. Today in the Rochester Public Library I read from a book titled, Secret Lives of the U.S. Presidents that, “George Washington demonstrated just how big a spender the chief executive could be. His salary was $25,000 (equivalent to about a million dollars today), of which an incredible seven percent was spent on alcohol.”

I, myself, don’t drink alcohol. And I don’t do drugs. I am frugal when I grocery shop, yet I must routinely eat at soup kitchens and depend on food pantries in order to survive. Somehow that seems a little unfair to me in such a wealthy, civilized nation where $5 billion dollars annually are spent on just wine alone.

Therefore, I hereby promise and declare that when I’m elected U.S. president I will do what’s called a “reverse tithe” of my annual presidential salary. A reverse tithe is when you donate 90 percent of your income, rather than only 10 percent, to a charitable cause, and you keep only 10 percent for yourself. That would still leave me with a quite comfortable $55,000 a year to live on — enough to avoid the long lines at the local soup kitchens.

But you’re going to have to help me, America. And that includes news editors and reporters, too. For this to work, we must believe the common good is good common sense.

Alex J. Boros

Rochester

To the Editor:

Cyclist Lance Armstrong, stripped of his seven Tour-de-France titles and an Olympic medal, finally came semi-clean regarding his use of performance enhancing drugs, which undeniably gave him an unfair advantage. Meanwhile, the Texas native Armstrong managed to amass around $100,000,000 in personal wealth (prize money, endorsements, enterprises and books). En-route, Lance and his lawyers discredited, humiliated and bullied anyone that had the audacity to tell the truth about how Lance achieved his success. He even berated, like another Texan named George W. Bush (over Iraq), the French for questioning the veracity of his performances in their prestigious world-class event. France must feel vindication on both accounts.

It must be the dangerous “Don’t mess with Texas” mindset that serves as the common denominator between Lance Armstrong, George W. Bush and Roger Clemens. These Texans have caused a lot of hearts and heads to ache over the past decade.

Why should Lance’s reprehensible behavior matter to a woefully imperfect, middle-aged and mediocre endurance athlete (Triathlete) like me, who just wants to stay fit and healthy? Well, I was frankly inspired by Lance’s story of surviving an extremely aggressive form of cancer and becoming the best in his field. I admire anyone that could qualify for, let alone win, an athletic event as grueling as the Tour-de-France. I was in awe of Lance’s superhuman ability to climb the mountain pasture, L’Alpe d’Huez (4,100-10,930’ for 8 miles) at a pace of 18 MPH.

To add insult to injury, I purchased, read and recommended two of Lance’s “nonfiction” books. I even bought a “Live-Strong” T-Shirt and frequently replaced my yellow “Live-Strong” bracelets. I’m not that disappointed about the latter two since the proceeds supposedly went to Lance’s worthwhile foundation. As for the books, I’d be happy to join a class action suit to receive a refund from Lance’s personal empire and donate it to the Special Olympics.

Anyhow, while Bush will never confess about costly Iraq not being about WMDs or 9/11/2001, at least Lance did tell the truth with the title of his first autobiography, “It’s Not About the Bike.”

Wayne H. Merritt

Dover

To the Editor:

After the tragedy in Newtown, it has become very clear to me that we need to do more to protect our children and families from the catastrophic effects of gun violence. Recently, I was surprised to learn that any NH resident can legally purchase a handgun without undergoing a criminal and mental health background check, so long as the transaction is made through a private sale (the so-called “gun show loophole”).

I was even more disturbed to find out that, as long as a firearm is purchased legally, the owner has a right to carry that weapon, loaded and unconcealed, on any street, in any neighborhood, in every community in New Hampshire. Is that really the culture we want our children and grandchildren growing up in?

In New Hampshire, it’s perfectly legal for someone who would fail a routine background check by a licensed firearms dealer to buy a gun, load it up with bullets, and carry it around where you and your loved ones live, work, shop, and play. While guns are banned in some public buildings, I also learned that NH law prohibits cities and towns from passing stronger ordinances to limit public areas where “open carry” of firearms is allowed.

As responsible citizens, we must find a way to balance respect for 2nd Amendment rights with the right of all Granite Staters — gun-owners and non-gun-owners alike — to feel reasonably safe from lethal violence in our own communities. Wouldn’t passing laws requiring criminal and mental health background checks for all firearm sales be a good place to start?